Our one comment on the Yahoo CEO thing… We suggest banning the phrase, “If someone is going to do X, then why have kids,” unless X is something that would result in a reasonable person calling Child Protective Services. Otherwise mind your own business. What you choose to do with your kids doesn’t mean they’re going to turn out any better than whatshername’s kids, and if you’re always all up in everybody else’s business… well, maybe you need to get more hobbies (since working for pay is such a horrible thought). Seriously.

Like this:

Related

39 Responses to “Link self-love”

Thanks so much for the shout-out. If you were here I’d bake a batch of cookies — your choice of flavor.
Wish you guys would show up (anonymously, of course) at FinCon12, even though you don’t write specifically to the topic of personal finance.
Then again, neither do I — all the time, anyway.

Clearly the last comment is meant for me, so thanks for the shout out. It probably makes no difference to you, but my comment about that was not in reference to people I don’t know, like Mayer.

When someone talks to me *directly* about how they are bummed to work so many hours, and are so stressed out, and don’t see their kids awake on work days, but then refuse to do anything about it, yeah, I’m going to be judgmental. I will offer solutions but when the same issues come up time and time again, and nothing changes, at some point I get tired of the bellyaching because they’re not looking for a solution, they’re apparently looking for someone to tell them that it’s ok. And I’m not that person. If you don’t like your situation, change it.

And yes, I think it’s being lazy when they say “I don’t know what to do with a baby” and don’t make an effort to try and figure it out, and instead hand him over *every time* to mom/nanny, who’s right there, all the time. I think that’s part of the job of being a parent, is to figure it out. It might be boring as hell, but you have to do it. Yeah, I’m being judgmental there, too.

I’m not making any claims about being a better parent, or how my kids will turn out. But yeah, if you do those things above, I’m going to call you out on being lazy.

Not just you. You’re one of many. Commentary was full of that sentiment this week.

And I feel really sorry for anyone who confides in you about their parenting problems given what you just said about always handing over to a nanny or mom. You’re obviously only pretending to be sympathetic unless you say that to their faces too. And the advice you’re offering may not be a good fit for their situation. The only problem they have is that they’re making a mistake looking for sympathy from you. Try being a little more honest next time and they’ll probably leave you alone.

I’m sure their kids are going to turn out just fine and there’s nothing wrong with using extended family help or paid help. Kids benefit from having multiple care providers.

And no, don’t think you’re judging me– we don’t have night nurses or extended family help and spend plenty of time with our kid(s), but we also don’t judge people who have different situations, especially since most mothers who judge about crap like that seem to have kids who watch a lot more TV and sleep a lot more than those who take advantage of alternate care arrangements. They just *feel* superior and like they can judge. Given that time-use studies show that SAHM and WOHM spend about the same amount of time actually interacting with their kids, I’m betting that most people, no matter how high holy they like to think they are, spend about the same amount of time interacting with their kids no matter what, and that’s probably about the right amount for the kids. People are, for the most part, in equilibrium. Kids are, for the most part, pretty flexible.

And there’s nothing at all wrong with being a lazy parent, especially in this world of over-helicoptering. Benevolent neglect builds character and creativity. Multiple adult providers give new and different experiences and perspectives. Kids get different things from different providers and different situations and that’s not bad or good, it’s just different.

However, saying that parents just have kids as “trophies” because they don’t cut to part-time work and spend two hours per day coming up with crafting activities… well, that’s adding to the culture of maternal guilt and it is feeding the patriarchy. Why add to the maternal guilt complex? What a horrible horrible thing to say about anyone. People do NOT have children as trophies. Just because someone hires someone else to allow them to sleep through the night does NOT mean that person shouldn’t have had children.

It would be different if you were talking about physical abuse or sexual abuse or true neglect. Some people really should not have had children. But when you’re talking about someone hiring high quality child-care or having extended family help out, that’s just an awful thing to say. How would you like it if people told the internet that you were unfit to be a mother because of decisions you’ve made? Especially if you were struggling with something? And people could do that because anything you do differently than what they did can become fodder for being judgmental.

And yes, I could have said things more politely, but it really pisses me off when people say that people shouldn’t have had children (the most common comment this past week… the creative phrase “trophy child” was your addition) when the children are being cared for.

Mothers cannot win, and passive-aggressive ranting about parental suitability (of people who are neither abusing nor neglecting their kids, just making different choices) in public forums doesn’t help ANYONE. Because everyone does something that another person thinks makes them unfit to have a kid.

Um, I didn’t say anything about “trophies”. I do know that there are a lot of cultural pressures around having kids before one is ready. And I do get plenty of judgment about working part-time and “wasting time” on things like crafting,, as well as declining activities for the kid after 7pm, so that’s not new either.

And you have no idea what kind of conversations I have with people. I don’t “pretend to be sympathetic”. People seek me out because I’m very open about my work arrangement, and they want to talk about it multiple times, and get specific advice on how to get the same kind of gig, and after the 3rd or 4th meeting of “Yes, but…” I lose patience.

I do think there’s a distinction between extended family helping out vs taking over. But in the end it’s whatever a person is happy with, right?

*I* may not see the point, but they have their reasons. I don’t see how that’s any different from any of the other 1,000 things you rant about here, except that apparently talking about parenting in a way you disagree with is Extra Special Bad.

Well, if you weren’t the person who said that people who hand their kids off to extended family have kids as trophies, then obviously that part of the rant did not apply to your comment and must have been someone else’s. If you didn’t say that people who don’t do X shouldn’t have kids, then obviously that was not addressing you.

Like I said, the internet was full of such comments this week.

I still think “I think it’s being lazy when they say “I don’t know what to do with a baby” and don’t make an effort to try and figure it out, and instead hand him over *every time* to mom/nanny, who’s right there, all the time. I think that’s part of the job of being a parent, is to figure it out. ” is highly unlikely to harm a kid in any way, and if it’s not going to harm the kid, then why on earth should anyone care, other than mom/nanny? (And if they care, it’s their job to address it.)

Incidentally, I was the one who said “trophy children” because my observation of some of these people is that they are doing it because, for some of them, it is a sign of their affluence. Their children are judged by how well they uphold this image. They most certainly aren’t neglecting their kids’ physical needs, but their kids do feel ignored and unloved. Their emotional needs for love and support are not met, especially if they don’t perform as the parents expect. Then they don’t have the easiest time relating with other people emotionally as adults…especially not their own children. (And if you think I’m being harsh, I know someone who did research on parents like this and looked at the effect on their kids. The things he said about the parents would’ve made a sailor blush because the damage is very real.)

Helping out versus having someone else parent are two different things. If you don’t know what to do with a baby, the answer is obviously not to hand it over to someone who does but to go find out what you could do with them, maybe even from that person who does know what to do. Saying you don’t know what you’d do with your kid is an excuse for not spending time being a responsible adult. Being genuinely busy is one thing…not wanting to spend time with your kids is another. And it’s very real and very hurtful to the children. And if you don’t want to spend time with them, then you shouldn’t be a parent.

I think we’re taking two different experiences and equating them with the words I’m using. I can only assume you’ve been around people who really do care for their kids. This, unfortunately, has not been the entirety of my experience.

As an example, I can think of one person in particular who fought tooth and nail to get custody of his daughter (although I’ve seen similar examples). And you know what he does when he has visitation? He drops her off with his parents, if he even goes to get her at all. Half the time he doesn’t show up. Can you imagine what his daughter goes through each week when he does this to her and how she feels about herself? And the only time he really seems interested in taking her places is when he’s got a new girlfriend and trying to show off what a good dad he is. I’m sorry, but that guy is a POS who doesn’t deserve to be a parent. And the sad thing is, he pretty much was the same way before he split with his wife. This is just one example, but there are parents who do this even when they’re together, who use work or other things as an excuse not to spend time with their kids. I’m not saying you have to dote on them or even entertain them. But if you’re sitting and watching TV, why not do it with them? Why not take them to the park once in a while (it’s free!). Just spend time with them and don’t act like it’s a freakin’ chore you’d rather avoid. That’s where I’m coming from.

I don’t know, I agree with the “if you don’t like your situation, change it” sentiment- or at least I mostly do. But, similar to the “if you don’t like the fact that your partner doesn’t do chores, change it” issue that drives me batty, there are factors at work that go beyond individual choice. Now, for my own sanity I may need to try to avoid conversations with people who just want to complain about a problem but won’t try to fix it, but I’m not sure that is the same as thinking it is OK to judge that person. In general, I think judging is risky, because I almost certainly don’t understand the full story.

Also, equating the use of night nannies/nurses with not being an involved parent makes me really, really, uncomfortable, particularly if the person talking hasn’t experienced life with a low sleep needs baby. Life with a low sleep needs baby is incredibly hard. I am not exaggerating when I say that parenting through the first 18 months of my first daughter’s life was the hardest thing I have ever done, both mentally and physically. We didn’t go the night nanny route, but maybe we should have. I’m certainly not going to cast aspersions on people who do.

Also, different cultures have different expectations about the roles of parents. And of grandparents. Our own culture has evolved greatly on this point in recent years. And yet, all of these different cultures manage to produce decent human beings. We may think we know the best way to parent now, but chances are our kids will think we were wrong on some key points, because culture changes, knowledge evolves, etc. etc.

Ditto here… even when it comes to money. DH has relatives who have constant money problems and yes, it drives us batty, but as we’ve learned more about it we’ve come to realize that there really are a lot of “factors at work that go beyond individual choice.” It is very difficult to escape that poverty trap when you’re surrounded by a specific culture. It was easier for my family and DH’s immediate family because of who DH’s dad married, because my father was an immigrant. And so they take two steps forward and one step back, and sometimes two steps back. And so we’re driven batty, but we have grown to have a lot more understanding about why they are in these circumstances and keep making bad decisions (though fewer bad decisions each year).

I agree with all this. Maybe there’s some distinction between being judgmental and being annoyed that I’m missing? I don’t think their kids will be screwed up, but I do think it’s lazy not to make the effort to figure out what to do with a baby when you’re alone with him, cultural roles or not. Maybe that is judgmental.

I’m not including the full backstory on something I found disturbing at work because I know ppl from work read my blog. But it was a discussion by 3 high ranking women (2nd or 3rd level mgrs) about how they shortened their leave, got day/night nannies, and family to stay so they could return to work ASAP and how that was great for them. Obviously it was, career wise, but it strikes fear into my heart that THAT is what it takes to be considered “dedicated” to your job at my company since these are people I would likely eventually work for. The only (public) dissenters were a handful of individual contributors. Maybe I’m reading too much into it, but that speaks volumens to me about what choices one is forced to make and what is valued.

@Anandi, I think you were the one who initially said you were judging, right? I took that cue from you. I know that in the chores case, I have annoyed people who thought I was judging, and things got a lot less heated when I made it explicit why I was asking questions- I was trying to better understand the situation/viewpoint of the people who felt they couldn’t change the chores situation, because I wanted to be able to give better advice to the young women who ask me about this issue, both IRL and online. I acknowledge that I sometimes feel annoyed by the people who feel trapped, but I also acknowledge that this annoyance is my problem, not theirs. This, incidentally, is an area in which I feel I’ve grown, thanks largely to interactions I’ve had with people online- even ones that at the time left me feeling hurt.

In the case of the high level managers at work- maybe it really was best for them overall, and not just from a career standpoint. Different mothers need different things. But maybe it was only good from a career standpoint and they feel like they missed something. I don’t know. I think the key is that if you are feeling like the culture at your company is not welcoming of how you want to live your life, the only thing you can legitimately hope to control is how you respond to that. You can stay and try to change the culture. You can look for a job at a company with a culture you like better. You can go out on your own as a contractor. You can change careers. Etc., etc. Each option has its pluses and minuses. But IMO, the most frustrating option is going to be “stay and judge the women who are choosing a different sort of life.”

“Equating the use of night nannies/nurses with not being an involved parent makes me really, really, uncomfortable, particularly if the person talking hasn’t experienced life with a low sleep needs baby.” Amen! Here’s another iteration of that, complete with loads of unspoken class elements:

Wow, what a bullshit post (that link is). Because there’s no time other than night or working hours to bond with a kid, and a kid is only allowed to bond with one person. Total BS.

Of course, if you cosleep, you’re doing it wrong. If you don’t cosleep, you’re doing it wrong. Etc. etc. etc. There’s no way of pleasing everybody’s belief that you should be allowed to have children. The only way to win the game is to ignore the patriarchy-guiltmongers… possibly calling them out whenever they intrude into public spaces.

The patriarchy guilt-mongers bother me most not because of my decisions (which, even if they weren’t optimal, because optimizing everything is a fool’s errand, are definitely working out just fine), but because I know insecure mothers who actually take their criticisms to heart. And that makes them miserable and even more insecure. Which is sad. Mothers should be allowed to feel confident in their parenting.

p.s. I like this excerpt from the comments, “The idea that the kid won’t know the difference between parent and nanny is one of those horror stories that people who can’t afford a luxury tell themselves so they don’t feel left out.” Especially since on mommy forums there’s always women (generally insecure moms who claim to fit into the “have to but don’t want to work” category) worried about exactly the same thing with daycare. My kid has never had a problem telling the difference between hir parents and the daycare peoples. And if ze loves the daycare peoples, then that’s a good thing because it means they’re good daycare peoples. It would be far worse if ze hated the daycare peoples.

I’m late to the discussion here but this, “I think it’s being lazy when they say “I don’t know what to do with a baby” and don’t make an effort to try and figure it out, and instead hand him over *every time* to mom/nanny, who’s right there, all the time. I think that’s part of the job of being a parent, is to figure it out. It might be boring as hell, but you have to do it.” has been bugging me on numerous dimensions since I read it last night.

Amongst the reasons:
* I’m of the opinion that most of the components of parenting can be outsourced well and effectively. Conceptually I’m disinclined to think that outsourcing all of them is a good way to parent, but outsourcing any significant subset really doesn’t bother me. Indeed, for much of recent Western human history it’s been the approach advocated for fathers. Relatedly …
* Babies? Really aren’t babies for long. Yes, they have important needs that must be met, and secure and stable attachment is among these, but it really doesn’t need to be attachment exclusively or even, necessarily, principally to the mother. What ethnographic work I’ve seen on this suggests that the median number of attached-to parent/alloparent people in the human infant’s evolutionarily “typical” environment is 2 or 3. Honestly, I’m in many ways more comfortable with handing off babies (conceptually and my very own) than older kids, in part because …
* I’m often struck by how many of those of us engaging in this debate have first-hand experience parenting only the preschool or, at most, elementary school set. I wonder how we will/would sound were we reconvened in 20 years to readdress these questions. I’m oddly situated in this regard, having (step)parented the 13-30-something set and the 0-5 set and that experience has led me to think that many of those complaining about the quality of mothering (or parenting, but usually it’s really about mothers) provided to most babies/toddlers/preschoolers are good with that age, but not so much with older kids. I’m not going to say one age is inherently harder or easier or that one skill set is more difficult to acquire than the other, but I do think the skill sets are different and that many people aren’t blessed with all the skill sets to parent effectively the full age range that parenting requires. Outsourcing is one way to deal with that (and my quick sense is that in contemporary US society there are often better outsourcing options for parents of infants/toddlers/preschoolers than older kids ).
* I also think we, and by that I pretty much mean all of us, are sold a bill of goods when it comes to what kids need, most glaringly captured in the oft-presented claim that moms “should” be out of (or way less engaged with) paid work when the kids are “little” and can/should resume paid (full-time) work “once the kids are in school.” Newsflash (yes, that word choice is sarcastic, but I’m not intending to direct the sarcasm to Anandi or anyone else reading here — it’s directed at the pop culture mags…): kids do not cease needing parental attention and time when they turn 5 … or 6 … or 10 … or even — unless you are one of the PF bloggers planning to change the locks on your kid’s 18th birthday — 18. And I do strongly believe that encouraging parents to focus their attention on meeting their kids’ needs from 0-5 does children and families a disservice because it falsely encourages us not to focus on the big-picture/long-term, and to ill effect. Relatedly, there is I think a propensity to emphasize babies’ needs for mothering (which, clearly are real, whether any given piece of mothering is, in fact, provided the baby’s mother or someone else) at the expense of children’s needs for parenting (and again, really, I’m blaming the pop-culture stuff, but I do think the excerpt quoted above also hints at this sort of emphasis).
* Last, and distinct from yet at the same time related to all or much of the above, and I say this as someone who’s basically a big fan of the idea that we can/should “figure it out” (though I include outsourcing in my toolkit as a possible solution I might “figure out”), I think claiming that we should just “figure it out” does a disservice to the possibility that any given woman (or man) may be facing real problems — post-partum depression springs to mind, but there are any number of others that might occur to anyone at any range of points in their life course and not be visible to the casual observer or, perhaps, even the person experiencing them — that do, in fact, impede their ability to “figure it out.” I don’t know where we strike the balance between respecting/assisting folks negotiating those travails and encouraging the rest of us to pull ourselves together, but I don’t think we should gloss over their existence.

Here at Grumpy Rumblings, we’re kind of pro-lazy parenting. Lazy parenting often seems to be the best kind as following one’s instincts is often the easiest path. We have a couple of posts on the topic.

Additionally, people can also accuse one of being lazy pre-natally as well if one isn’t following the perfect diet, if one is planning a specific kind of birth rather than another, if one isn’t exercising the right amount or the right way. There’s nothing special about 0-1 when it comes to potential accusations of laziness. Anything a person does differently than another person can turn into “I think it’s being lazy when woman (and it is always woman) does not do X related to her child-rearing and doesn’t even make an effort.” There is not a single person who isn’t in a glass house from someone else’s perspective.

How is banning the phrase “If someone is going to do X, then why have kids” being less judgmental than asking the question in the first place? For the record, it really was an honest question: why in the world would someone have kids if they aren’t going to spend the time it takes to parent them? If you are not in a position (such as financial need) where you need to be at work 80 hours a week, why would you do that and ignore your children? It’s a foreign mindset. I also wonder about people who buy dogs and then just tie them to a tree in the yard. I really, genuinely have no clue what the motivation could be to do such a thing. On the other hand, I have this tendency to be very committed to the tasks I take on, parenting included, and I know a lot of people don’t understand that, either.

Maybe they aren’t “working”, but I know people who are physically present at their job at least 80 hours per week…and some of them do it to avoid families. As I said on Anandi’s post: I get that there are a lot of moms that want to have careers and be away from our kids at least some of the day. (I couldn’t stand being a SAHM because I needed the stimulation of being around adults and doing interesting work.) As far as neglecting and ignoring kids, I’ll comment further above.

The Daily Show last Monday had a great segment on the ones that have been released as well. Contrasting his 77K tax business deduction for essentially taking his horse to “horse prom” with his comments about how people who want things like food and medical care are forcing the rest of us to pay for their stuff. A really nice summation about how tax breaks advantage the wealthy but aren’t viewed in the same way, even though they’re paid for in the same way.

I am clearly not the target audience here. There must be some internet firestorm that if I knew about it I would wish I could return to my current blissful ignorance. Personally I judge people all the time in the car. Just today somebody pulled into my lane so I had to brake heavily…so I just told myself they’re probably either just learning how to drive or just forgetting due to drugs or something. Pretty judgmental, but then I wasn’t so angry, because how can I be angry at someone I feel sorry about? Not that I really feel sorry for Yahoo’s CEO…I don’t know him/her, but assuming this person had a kid and is returning to work quickly (ala any father in tv shows/books set in the 50s at least), so what? We have laws and law enforcement solely to prevent and punish behavior that has been deemed harmful. That’s why you don’t hear so much about kids losing hands while working in factories these days. Perhaps the laws need to be adjusted…we could prevent people from working, perhaps? or prevent them from having kids? The US hasn’t dabbled too much in eugenics yet, and hopefully it won’t, but maybe we just need to prevent workaholics from breeding? Anyway, like I said, I clearly don’t know what’s going on, but if we start considering nannies to be evil, where will it stop…a return to communes and having the entire village raise our children?

On a more serious note, I liked the cat pics. Truly. And doctors are both amazing and horrible…it’s not really their fault for the most part and I tend to pity them, but generally they are pains in the butt to work with.

Yikes! This certainly turned into quite a discussion (the sort I like getting my teeth into, at times),but I thought it was about celebrating a blogoversary?

On that note – happy two years! And you managed to fete the day on the Belgian National Holiday (July 21), which makes you cool in my book…

As to all of the above and parenting, having lived my own little saga, I personally believe in “walk in another’s shoes,” not to mention, don’t judge. Don’t judge doesn’t mean you don’t have opinions, but we do seem inclined in this culture to expend enormous energy criticizing other parents’ (mothers’) choices, rather than looking to improve opportunities and choices for women, which directly and indirectly improves life for our children.

All this conversation is intriguing (and disturbing) when you step outside an American context and into (if possible) another cultural mindset. My own (European) experience allows me recognize that in other countries children are not the center of the universe but are absolutely loved, assisted, cared for; many hands participate in that process (schools, childcare, grandparents, aunts and uncles, neighbors), and the “village” concept is real – and necessary – especially when one is a single parent or there are health problems or if there is a spouse in the military or a traveling spouse, etc.

In other words – all kinds of variants exist, many people can have a hand in loving and teaching our children, and doesn’t that make sense?

My (unsolicited) two cents… Off my soapbox, and happy two years! (Thx for stopping by my place. It’s been too long, and too long for me here, too!)

“Walk in another’s shoes … Don’t judge doesn’t mean you don’t have opinions, but we do seem inclined in this culture to expend enormous energy criticizing other parents’ (mothers’) choices, rather than looking to improve opportunities and choices for women, which directly and indirectly improves life for our children.” – all very well said, @BigLittleWolf. Thank you!